Summarry
Election boycotts have no place in a functioning democracy; participation being at the heart of the democratic process. However, boycotts could have a role to play in a democracy that is not functioning as it should be and where fair competition is impossible. The problem lies in determining at what point conditions for a fair election are being violated to such an extent that a boycott is justifiable. Even if justifiable it should be considered as a last resort. In most cases opposition parties have concluded that participation in the electoral process – even if it is unequal – is more beneficial than boycotting it. Choosing to be outside the electoral process is a highly risky political tactic and can come with high costs. Both the degree of sympathy and interest in any boycott by the wider electorate is a crucial factor in determining the impact of any boycott. Their impacts are often minimal and can be managed by the incumbent government unless the boycott is accompanied by other measures which hinder ability to govern or there is a minimum voter participation required. Boycotts therefore often impact upon legitimacy but not the final result. There is also a very real danger that resorting to a boycott can have a long-term and damaging effect on the democratic process.

Historical evidence has proved that election boycotts area suicidal weapon to fight an entrenched dictatorship.
In fact the strategy has never proved to be effective anywhere in the world. at worst it can undermine the legitimacy of an election (but not alter its outcome. ........... its one thing to undermine a DICTATOR .... but another thing to UNSEAT him.

Especially where the international community DOES not care for a country like GHENYA